Once again we enter that grey area of 'what constitutes a sports car?' In my
definition, I like to think of what a friend said upon hearing I bought my
3A last year to go with the 6 I've had since '79. He drives a Lexus 400SC at
present, but at one time a decade ago suffered with a 'possessed' 911 of
1968 vintage. Of his SC he says: it's fast, smooth, reliable. Everything
works like it's supposed to. BUT IT'S GOT NO SOUL!
That's a part of the mix! (Again) just my $.02. JD
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Lindeman [SMTP:faustus@inconnect.com]
Sent: March 15, 1999 10:53 AM
To: Laura G.
Cc: Andrew Mace; Joe Curry; Spitfire List; Triumph List
Subject: Re: Mustang...Spitfire???
When I say Japanese sports cars, I'm refering to sports cars.
The 240Z, MR2, newest Supras, newest 300ZX, and even the Miata. Not
to
mention the new Honda coming this fall.
Andy L.
Maybe I'll buy a NSX next...
On Sun, 14 Mar 1999, Laura G. wrote:
>
> I'm going to butt in here-
>
> For me, a sports car is a two seater, manual transmission-and
certainly not
> much larger than a 512 BB (certainly one of the larger sports cars
or
> Ferrarris for that matter.) And with a lower ground clearance.
That would
> leave out Mustangs and any of the japanese so-called "sports
coupes"/"sports
> sedans" (an oxymoron if there ever was one!) Hey y'all! Just
because it has
> a manual transmission-doesn't make a Camry (et.al.) a "sports
car"! (And I
> do know people who will tell me that they have a sports car-a
Sentra or
> something-just because it has a stick! Puh-leese!)
>
> Which brings us around to *gasp* the Saturn _THREE_ door coupe!
Excuse me-
> but if it has _THREE_ doors (the third one not being a hatch
back)--is it
> _really_ a (by definition of the word) "coupe"?
>
> O.K. I feel better, having gotten my little rant off!
>
> At ease. Smoke 'em if you got 'em.
>
> Laura G. and Nigel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Mace <amace@unix2.nysed.gov>
> To: Joe Curry <spitlist@gte.net>
> Cc: Spitfire List <spitfires@autox.team.net>; Triumph List
> <triumphs@autox.team.net>
> Date: Sunday, March 14, 1999 1:17 PM
> Subject: Re: Mustang...Spitfire???
>
>
> >
> >On Sun, 14 Mar 1999, Joe Curry wrote:
> >
> >> Andrew Mace wrote:
> >>
> >> > But it was still a pretty clever thing, that original Mustang
of April
> >> > 1964. I'll take one!
> >> >
> >>
> >> Yeah but only because they are "cute" or valuable, not because
they are
> >> a true Sports Car. "Car and Driver" magazine did not rate it
very
> >> highly in their first report on the car! 8^)
> >
> >As I recall, "TIME" liked it just fine! :-) Besides, if one knew
which
> >parts and options to order (as did, for example, a certain Mr.
Shelby),
> >one indeed could make quite the sports car out of the Mustang. Of
course,
> >by that time the price was up there with the E-Type or the Cobra.
> >
> >--Andy
> >
> >* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> >* Andrew Mace, President and *
> >* 10/Herald/Vitesse (Sports 6) Consultant *
> >* Vintage Triumph Register <www.vtr.org> *
> >* amace@unix2.nysed.gov *
> >* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
|